Hitler

Mountain_Girl406 said:

Not focusing just on Hitler for a moment, if Germany was 95% Christian, it's reasonable to conclude that the vast majority of rank and file soldiers were Christian as well. How were they able to fight for a cause that was so obviously wrong? Why didn't their faith kick in?

Click to expand...

We look at what they were fighting for from an outside perspective and 70+ years after the fact. The Germans were nationalists and felt like they had been done wrong by all the countries around them. Everybody sees themselves as the 'good guys' so in their mind their cause was righteous. They were told Ethnic-Germans were being slaughtered in Poland so obviously the Germans would want to protect them.

Mountain_Girl406 said:

So, were the Catholic Churches in Germany preaching against the moral evil surrounding them during the time of WW2 and the Holocaust? Were they telling the faithful to lay down their arms and refuse orders to kill and imprison Jews, as they now teach the faithful to not have abortions and fight for the unborn?

Click to expand...

No, the Catholic Churches in Nazi Germany were not preaching against the moral evils of the regime and Rome, for the majority of the war, was rather silent on the matter as well. What official statements the Church did offer tended to focus more on the evil of the poor treatment of Catholics by the Nazi regime than on the threat that the Nazis posed to the world and the other evils she was engaged in. The Church has since apologized for not taking a firmer stance and been overtly and harshly critical of Nazism. I can understand why, given the state of Italy at the time. It is unfortunate, because while Germany would not have altered her course if the Church demanded it, Italy might have. Then again, Musolini's thugs might also have bulldozed Vatican City.

Mountain_Girl406 said:

So, were the Catholic Churches in Germany preaching against the moral evil surrounding them during the time of WW2 and the Holocaust?

Click to expand...

Hitler closed the Catholic Churches in Germany.

WarriorAngel said:

Hitler closed the Catholic Churches in Germany.

Click to expand...

"
It quickly became clear that [Hitler] intended to imprison the Catholics, as it were, in their own churches. They could celebrate mass and retain their rituals as much as they liked, but they could have nothing at all to do with German society otherwise. Catholic schools and newspapers were closed, and a propaganda campaign against the Catholics was launched."

— Extract from An Honourable Defeat by Anton Gill

Mountain_Girl406 said:

"
It quickly became clear that [Hitler] intended to imprison the Catholics, as it were, in their own churches. They could celebrate mass and retain their rituals as much as they liked, but they could have nothing at all to do with German society otherwise. Catholic schools and newspapers were closed, and a propaganda campaign against the Catholics was launched."

— Extract from An Honourable Defeat by Anton Gill

Click to expand...

I forgot about the schools too.
However; from what i read and i had to research this for an essay on the Pope and Hitler - Hitler eventually closed the churches - as he was also killing Catholics in Poland by the sum of 3 million.

Looks like there's a lot to learn, and understand..MikeK makes a good point that we should also look at Italy and Spain too if we want to look at this from a Catholic instead of general Christian perspective as those were certainly Catholic countries.
I don't know about the argument of putting things in historical context when we speak of the Church and the morality it teaches as being unchanging. If we say it was ok for an individual to go along with the actions or participate in the activities of the Axis nations because that was simply the time they live in, then we'd have to make a similar exception for modern issues, I think.

The Church did not call upon Catholics to, wherever they may have been, fight they Axis powers. In hindsight that would have put even more Catholic lives at risk in the short term, and brought St Peter's Square to rubble, but would have resulted in all non or of sabotage making it difficult for the war industry to operate. The Church could have shortened the European war markedly, but not without risk. That has long been the criticism against Her, but She was not in a comfortable position.

RileyG said:

No non-Catholics please.

Hi!

My younger brother (17) claims that "Hitler was a Christian and professed his Catholic faith". I told him that "Hitler only received Baptism and rejected Christianity at a very early age. He also persecuted not only Jews, but Catholics as well. Likewise, his behavior was very anti-Christian, he failed to bother to love God and his neighbor.

My brother seems to be in a rebellious stage where he is rebelling against God.

He also mentioned Luther's anti-Semitism which, to a certain extent, inspired Hitler. (I actually DO agree with him on that, but I will not go into that).

Any truth to this?

Thanks

-Riley

Click to expand...

My thoughts? Hitler in the beginning wasn't wrong per say for what was happening to Germany. If you really know the history (not revisionist) there is so much more to it. It can be said the same is happening here in the USA. The influence Hollywood has on morals and shoving it down our throats, the greedy banking industry owning on running this country... I do not want to get into it. I don't know much about Hitler's Christianity and he did also persecute Catholics. St. Maxmillian Colby comes to mind. For what ever the reason, he just went off the rails and did awful things.

The devil uses people who have a right to be upset by what happens in our society to have them commit horrible atrocities. It will continue to happen through out time. This mess over the Confederacy, 150 year old war that's been over and done brought up again for political gain and to delude people into following their agenda by creating a race divide.

So anyway, that's my rant for today... Hitler is far to complexed a topic to discuss, IMO. What I do know is somebody, somewhere discovered, holler racist and anti Semitism and you can write your own ticket to do what ever you want. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Mountain_Girl406 said:

Looks like there's a lot to learn, and understand..MikeK makes a good point that we should also look at Italy and Spain too if we want to look at this from a Catholic instead of general Christian perspective as those were certainly Catholic countries.
I don't know about the argument of putting things in historical context when we speak of the Church and the morality it teaches as being unchanging. If we say it was ok for an individual to go along with the actions or participate in the activities of the Axis nations because that was simply the time they live in, then we'd have to make a similar exception for modern issues, I think.

Click to expand...

I dont think anyone is suggesting that anything was ok to go along with.
I believe the reality is - ppl might claim to be Catholic but have no intention to neither act nor think as the Church teaches morally. Hitler did initially claim to be Catholic, but Hitler wasnt [obviously] really following the moral teachings of the Church...nor did he ever intend to.
Being Catholicism was popular - with many followers - he was essentially reaching out as some would with a trojan horse to 'look' like he was harmless...and even worse - like he was heroic.

I am shaky on details right now [memory serving me] there was a fire that he actually helped set up [tragedy gives politicians a platform to act heroic] and he 'saved the day' so to speak and then pushed the leader [forget his name] to name him top dude and then in Austria they voted for him... because he 'seemed' like he was doing a bang up job in Germany [per gossip]

Etc etc etc

As far as him acting in good faith towards or with an inkling of Catholic consciousness or Christian for that matter - it's markedly obvious that was not his intent at any time.
He deceived the population to get where he wanted - then he took over almost completely.
It came down to the ppl opting to allow him to be persuasive.
Did this mean ppl even then were lukewarm in their faith?
Maybe.
It would - i think - be evident that killing anyone whatsoever wasnt the right thing to do.
Where there is charisma - there should be serious concern. Charisma can sometimes be a tool of a narcissistic sociopath..
which Hitler certainly was.
Hence ppl allowed themselves to follow along - because they couldnt see the forest for the trees - and ignored the HS in conscience.

Peter Fritzsche, a left-leaning historian, wrote on page 210 in his book Germans into Nazis that the Nazis had "anti-capitalist appeal" for the German socialist of that time. And on page 192 Fritzsche explained, "Even in left-wing Berlin the National Socialists garnered nearly 140,000 votes, a personal success for Berlin's Gauleiter Joseph Goebbels, for whom the tally was nothing less than an 'overwhelming victory.'" He also said, "Most immune to the Nazis, however, were provincial Catholic voters in Upper Silesia, Lower Bavaria, and northern Westphalia." (Fritzsche, 206)

I use what Fritzsche said as an example so that liberals can't object to the source.

Source:
Peter Fritzsche, Germans into Nazis (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998).

Ahhh Joseph Goebbels. Thanks, i didnt feel like looking.

This fanaticism is getting absurd.

LivingWordUnity said:

Peter Fritzsche, a left-leaning historian, wrote on page 210 in his book Germans into Nazis that the Nazis had "anti-capitalist appeal" for the German socialist of that time. And on page 192 Fritzsche explained, "Even in left-wing Berlin the National Socialists garnered nearly 140,000 votes, a personal success for Berlin's Gauleiter Joseph Goebbels, for whom the tally was nothing less than an 'overwhelming victory.'" He also said, "Most immune to the Nazis, however, were provincial Catholic voters in Upper Silesia, Lower Bavaria, and northern Westphalia." (Fritzsche, 206)

I use what Fritzsche said as an example so that liberals can't object to the source.

Source:
Peter Fritzsche, Germans into Nazis (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998).

Click to expand...

This is one of the more.... interesting.. takes on that work that I have ever seen. Hand to God, straight up - Did you read this book in its entirety? If you did, I wouldn't think that you'd resort to such quote mining, and I would think that you would have mentioned the virtual opposites in policy that the Nazis held vs the Democratic Socialist and the Communist parties. In fact, the struggle of the socialists and Communists against the Nazis and their polar differences in economic and for the most part, social policy, is a central theme of the book.

Further, the idea that someone might trust an author because a person states that they are left-leaning or right-leaning is an absurd sort of binary tunnel vision. I would never rhink so lowly of the typical conservative as to suggest that conservatives would be likely to trust Hutton Gibson's conclusions as a student of Judaism and Israel.

MikeK said:

This fanaticism is getting absurd.

This is one of the more.... interesting.. takes on that work that I have ever seen. Hand to God, straight up - Did you read this book in its entirety? If you did, I wouldn't think that you'd resort to such quote mining, and I would think that you would have mentioned the virtual opposites in policy that the Nazis held vs the Democratic Socialist and the Communist parties. In fact, the struggle of the socialists and Communists against the Nazis and their polar differences in economic and for the most part, social policy, is a central theme of the book.

Further, the idea that someone might trust an author because a person states that they are left-leaning or right-leaning is an absurd sort of binary tunnel vision. I would never rhink so lowly of the typical conservative as to suggest that conservatives would be likely to trust Hutton Gibson's conclusions as a student of Judaism and Israel.

Click to expand...

Since you can't object to the source you attack my character and call me names. Yes, I read the whole book, not just passively but actively with notes and highlighting from the beginning of the book to the end. That's how I know that the author leans to the left—through the whole book he talks about socialism as if it is something good. It was required reading for me in a college class, and I had to write a paper on it. I still own the book. The professor I had was an ultra hardcore feminist who adores Peter Fritzsche. That's how I know that Fritzsche is someone who liberals can't object to as a source.

LivingWordUnity said:

Since you can't object to the source or to the content of my post you attack my character and call me names. Yes, I read the whole book, not just passively but actively with notes and highlighting from the beginning of the book to the end. That's how I know that the author leans to the left—through the whole book he talks about socialism as if it is something good. It was required reading for me in a college class, and I had to write a paper on it. I still own the book. The professor I had was an ultra hardcore feminist who adores Peter Fritzsche. That's how I know that Fritzsche is someone who liberals can't object to as a source. Since you are accusing me of "quote mining" can you tell me how I am misrepresenting him?

Click to expand...

I already did. One of his central themes was the direct opposition in beliefs and policies of the Social Democrats (socialists) and the Communists, both of which were strong opposition parties when the Nazis gained power and both of which were persecuted greatly under Nazisim. The quote you selected mentions 140,000 people but fails to address that the population of Berlin was over 4,000,000 in 1930, and that you're talking about 3% of the population. He does not make the claim that socialists or communists were generally cool with Nazism, which is what your carefully-selected quote rather implies.

What names did I call you?

MikeK said:

I already did. One of his central themes was the direct opposition in beliefs and policies of the Social Democrats (socialists) and the Communists, both of which were strong opposition parties when the Nazis gained power and both of which were persecuted greatly under Nazisim. The quote you selected mentions 140,000 people but fails to address that the population of Berlin was over 4,000,000 in 1930, and that you're talking about 3% of the population. He does not make the claim that socialists or communists were generally cool with Nazism, which is what your carefully-selected quote rather implies.

Click to expand...

Can you tell me which pages you found that on? I provided the author, the book, and the page numbers for my quotes, so I think it's fair that you would do the same especially since you are the one who is claiming that the other person is wrong.

MikeK said:

What names did I call you?

Click to expand...

You called me a fanatic. I've never claimed to be perfect, but at least I don't resort to name calling.

MikeK said:

This fanaticism is getting absurd.

Click to expand...

I know that it was intended for me since it was my post that you were addressing when you said it.
.

LivingWordUnity said:

Can you tell me which pages you found that on? I provided the author, the book, and the page numbers for my quotes, so I think it's fair that you would do the same especially since you are the one who is claiming that the other person is wrong.

Click to expand...

I'm not claiming that the author is wrong, I am claiming that you are selectively quoting what supports your bias and ignoring what is inconvinient to you. I do not own that book and cannot cite chapter and verse, but I am familiar with it.

I notice that you ignored my pointing out how fundamentally rediculous th assertions is that if a person's leans one way politically and makes a statement, then others who lean the same way will affirm it is. I accept your tacit concession.

You called me a fanatic.

Click to expand...

I did no such thing. While it is true that I believe you to be a fanatic and believe that you display fanaticism with a myriad of topics like Islam and Obama and socialism and the end times and Putin apologies, I did not call you a fanatic. I may have inferred or suggested that you are, but I called you nothing. Had I called you such a name, I suspect that upon sincere reflection, you would not disagree with such an assesment.

Upon reflection, I realize that I am blessed.

RileyG said:

No non-Catholics please.

Hi!

My younger brother (17) claims that "Hitler was a Christian and professed his Catholic faith".

Click to expand...

No non-Catholics, seriously??

I have much detailed information about Hitler's religious beliefs, I guess you don't want to hear it from a non-Catholic......

....I'm sorry but when I'm investigating something, I'd want to hear from everyone even from opposing views so I don't miss anything!!

I have nothing against Catholics, just so you know. I hold them with no less regards from my own beliefs.

timewerx said:

No non-Catholics, seriously??

I have much detailed information about Hitler's religious beliefs, I guess you don't want to hear it from a non-Catholic......

Click to expand...

I want to hear from you .

Colin said:

I want to hear from you .

Click to expand...

Here goes:

Was Hitler a Catholic? Nope, He only pretended to support the Catholic Church to gain support from the German Catholic majority. Privately, Hitler is a non-Catholic. And once Hitler became leader of Nazi, he slowly began opposing the Catholic Church.

Was Hitler a Christian? Yes, He belonged to a now extinct denomination called "Deutsche Christens" (and later called "Positive Christianity" of the Nazis) which is similar to the early (also extinct) Christian Johannite sect (followers of the disciple John the Beloved).


Theological beliefs of Adolf Hitler:

- Only trusts the Book of John and the synoptic Gospels.
- Rejects the whole Old Testament because of its Jewish origins and the fact a portion of it is found in the Torah - one of the religious books of Judaism and also due to its distinct theology compared to the Gospels.
- Rejects Apostle Paul because Paul did not deny being a Pharisee. Modern Judaism is the direct descendant of Pharisee.
- Rejects all other apostolic writings due to their distinctiveness from the Four Gospels and Jewish corruption, including those of books authored by Paul.
- The true Jews are not Judaists
- Judaism is the religion of the fake Jews
- The fake Jews were originally Khazars

- Loves Jesus Christ - believes Jesus Christ to have German/Aryan blood (a non-Jew) due to his Galilean origin and his fierceness in opposing the Jews and their religion..
- Believes Jesus Christ to be the first Nazi (anti-Semitic) who fiercely opposed the Jews and their religion, according to John chapter 8 and chapter 10.


Even if how unorthodox this maybe, Hitler is a Christian for the simple fact he admired Jesus greatly, he was a big fan!

And there's some (disturbing) logical truths in his beliefs, especially John chapter 8 and chapter 10. John Chapter 8 and chapter 10 does bring into question all Jewish materials in the Bible, the whole Old Testament and all the writings of Apostle Paul, especially when Jesus warned us against the "Yeast of the Pharisees" - Judaism, and Torah is a huge part of Judaism.

Sorry for not posting the links. It will make my reply too long. You can simply google the things I posted here.